9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of imposition of penalty are distinct and separate and even if the offences are committed in the course of same transaction or arises out of the same act, the penalty is imposable for ingredients of both the offences - Therefore, penalty can certainly be imposed on erring persons under both the above Sections, especially since the ingredients of the two offences are distinct and separate. Perhaps ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore a show cause notice was issued demanding duty of service tax of Rs.93,827/- and Rs.15,876/- being interest thereon. Penalties under Section 76, 77 78 of the Finance Act, 1944 were proposed. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and interest and imposed penalties under various sections. On appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) also confirmed the demand and penalty under Section 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is also a punishment more than once for the same alleged offence. 3. The order of the Hon ble High Court, Kerala in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Krishna Poduval reported in 2006 (1) STR 185 (Ker.) is relevant to the present case and is reproduced below: 11.The penalty imposable under S. 76 is for failure to pay service tax by the person liable to pay the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the two offences are distinct and separate. Perhaps invoking powers under S. 80 of the Finance Act, the appropriate authority could have decided not to impose penalty on the assessee if the assessee proved that there was reasonable cause for the said failure in respect of one or both of the offences. 3. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in imposing separate penalties under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
